Suspended Sentence
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 12:17 AM PDT
93 comments
ARTHUR:
Anaheim calling to the hockey world...
Two minutes into the 2nd period of last night's tussle between the Ducks and Blackhawks, Brent Seabrook put a high hit on Corey Perry behind the net. No call was made on the play, but moments later, Duncan Keith misplayed the puck behind the net, drawing Keith and Seabrook closer together and forcing Keith to make an impromptu play around his defense partner. James Wisniewski used the opportunity to drill Seabrook, crumpling the Chicago defenseman to the ice. A fight between Wisniewski and Keith ensued, and the official calls after the whistle were 5 minute Majors for Fighting for each player, a 2 minute Minor to Keith for Holding and a 2 minute Minor to Wisniewski for Charging. Seabrook returned to the bench but left for the locker room shortly thereafter and did not return.
The focus of the NHL and its fans has recently turned to head hits and "dirty" hits, especially with the recent Ovechkin hit on Brian Campbell. One can't help but wonder if the NHL Wheel of Justice is coming for James Wisniewski, who has already faced its wrath once this season. Daniel, should James Wisniewski be suspended for his hit on Brent Seabrook?
DANIEL:
It's hard to get angry at Wisniewski for sticking up for what was, with Getzlaf out, the biggest star in the Anaheim lineup. I'm not sure he should be suspended, but I'm pretty sure he will be. After Ovechkin got that two game suspension for a reckless play near the boards that was more unfortunate accident than malicious hit, how could Wisniewski not be suspended when he clearly smoked Brent Seabrook without Seabrook ever taking possession of the puck. I'm not sure this is the most dangerous of hits, but the culture that the NHL is trying to promote for next season demands that something happen for a hit like this. It was clearly an unexpected hit, and to the East Coast fans who remember the Thuggish Ruggish Ducks of the Burke years, this will be just another example of a team that would be more suited to the prison leagues than the NHL.
Seabrook probably brought a little bit of this upon himself by making a reckless hit on Corey Perry, one that should probably warrant its own suspension. But the league has shown that it is much more interested in punishing hits that injure rather than ones that are truly reckless, and if the league is going to stick to that philosophy, then Seabrook's early departure should probably lead to Wisniewski's disappearance as well.
ARTHUR:
I think Wisniewski will be suspended, but not because this is a hit on par with what the NHL is looking to outlaw for next season. This isn't a "blindside" or "back pressure" hit. It's an "unsuspecting" hit, but it's a hit the NHL has already outlawed. This was a 5 minute Major for Interference that did not get called on the ice. Charging is a fine call if Seabrook actually had possession of the puck or if Wisniewski wasn't two feet tall, but neither of those things were true when the hit was made. The NHL has already outlawed what Wisniewski did, but because he wasn't punished in-game and because Seabrook returned to the bench at the end of the play, he still has yet to be punished as the rule allows. For that reason, I think Campbell can come down on him for this. And because Wisniewski has already taken a suspension for a hit this season, I think Campbell can come down on him as hard as he likes.
Ultimately, Paul Devorski and Ian Walsh dropped the ball last night. First, by not calling the initial hit on Perry and then by not properly calling the retaliation hit on Seabrook. I would be hard-pressed to say that Wisniewski did anything wrong under the circumstances. Seabrook was playing with fire by going after Perry when the Anaheim forward corps is so riddled with injuries. I don't know if he was expecting the Ducks to go after Kane or Toews in retaliation, but he had to assume something was coming his way. And that's just not the sort of chance you can take with so many injured defensemen in your lineup. You can't assume their enforcer will pull your enforcer aside or they will wait for you to put your head down. If you throw at someone's head, you've got to be prepared for them to rush the mound.
If the NHL wants to punish injuries instead of intent, fine, but the referees have to do their part to stop situations from escalating into an injury. Wisniewski should be suspended because what he did was against the rules and he wasn't punished in-game, but make no mistake, Seabrook is complicit in his own injury. He's not missing time for the senseless acts of an amoral goon.
Wisniewski, Marchant and Perry offer their thoughts on the game.
0 recs |
93 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Personal opinion of the game
Seabrook hit on Perry: Looked bad, but it was clean (shoulder to shoulder). Perry hit the boards, but he was fine. If his head was really hit into the glass, he’d be down for sure.
Wisniewski hit on Seabrook: A stupid one. In the heat of the moment, Wis probably thought he was just sticking up for Perry, but, if he wanted to do that, just drop gloves, don’t bash a guy’s head into the glass. He’ll probably get suspended.
Perry “hit” on Sopel: Sopel dived. Perry tried to get position on the puck, nudged Sopel and all of a sudden Sopel goes flying into the air. The no-call there was a good one.
When watching any sports game, I never want to see anyone get injured, even if they’re huge assholes. Wish Seabrook a speedy recovery and hope Wis learns to not do dumb things like that.
"Just another Halo victory" - Rory Markas
ooked bad, but it was clean (shoulder to shoulder)
I wouldn’t say that was shoulder to shoulder. He catches Perry around the shoulder or between the shoulder blades, but he threw out an elbow/forearm at head height. And NHL Elbowing Rule 46.5 doesn’t say that the Elbow has to make contact with the head, simply that it result in an injury to the head or face. If Seabrook executes that hit a little harder, and Perry’s face plants into the glass a little harder, that’s undeniably a Major penalty for Elbowing. To me, on television, it looked like he was going to elbow him up high and reaching to do it, so I don’t mind that being the consensus on what Wisniewski or everyone else saw.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:19 AM PDT up reply actions
So, basically, your argument is “If Seabrook actually elbowed Perry, that would totally have been an elbow?”
Oh, and bonus points to Brian Hayward for somehow managing to make the clowns on Altitude appear unbiased by comparison.
he makes contact with his elbow. He has to reach to catch Perry. It’s not like he lowers his shoulder and catches him flush. Pronger reached to catch McAmmond, and the world acted like it was the most pre-meditated act of Pronger’s career to extend his arm, so I have no problem calling Seabrook out for this.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions
who are
the numbnuts you have writing your blog in cali…the hit seabs laid on was legal…the hit wiz laid was dirty and uncalled for…why do players now feel the need to retaliate for clean hits?
sopel did dive, but was still a penalty and shouldve have been called both ways
and screw the anaheim announcers for thinking seabs faked the effects of the hit even if they apologized later
No, Seabrook’s hit was pretty dirty. I honestly think Seabrook’s hit was worse than Wisniewski’s. Seabrook is looking at Perry’s back and pushes his head into the boards. Wis comes strait into Seabrook’s chest and follows through to the head. If Seabrook was paying better attention, he should have seen Wiz coming. Perry might have known Seabrook was there, but he was in a much more vulnerable position, considering he was face towards the boards whereas Seabrook was already back against the boards.
My final statement would be simply this. If you think Ovie should have been suspended for what he did to Brian Campbell, then you should think that Seabrook should be suspended for what he did to Perry, since they were pretty much equal style hits.
are you a moron
or do you not have a set of eyes…
wiz left his blue line, went right after seabs, lead with his elbows and left his skates
i do not think ovies hit deemed a suspension but i do not think the league was wrong is suspending him seeing as he seems to pull this shit constantly and was more a suspension for the culmination of his bonehead plays
I havent closely reviewed
the replay, but from what I’ve read online, he didn’t leave his feet and jump into seabrook.
And look, if the bulk of your comments is going to be “are you a moron” there are plenty of other juvenile places on the Internet for your thoughtless banter.
It would be great if someone can freeze frame the moment Wiz hits Seabrook. Let’s see where he hits Seabrook and where his skates are at the time of the hit.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 8:07 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Here is a sequence of the hit
You can tell Wiz is leaving his skates. Even if he didn’t, it’s still a dirty play that warrants a long suspension.
Competitive violence, that's why you're here!
No I’m not a moron, just someone who refuses to let his fan bias get in the way of his opinions. Perry was Ina vulnerable position against th boards and Seabrook went for his head. Wisniewski caught Seabrook in the chest and followed through and got his hands up. In terms of potential to injure, Seabrook made the worse hit. He was just lucky Perry didn’t get hurt. Even if Wisniewski is guilty of charging, which I think is a fair call, the possibility of doing serious damage to a guy who has 4 inches and probably 20 pounds on you when you come directly into his chest, can’t be nearly as bad as putting your shoulder to the back if a guy’s beck and head area and sending his face into the boards.
by Daniel AC on Mar 18, 2010 8:14 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Even if Wisniewski is guilty of charging, which I think is a fair call, the possibility of doing serious damage to a guy who has 4 inches and probably 20 pounds on you when you come directly into his chest, can’t be nearly as bad as putting your shoulder to the back if a guy’s beck and head area and sending his face into the boards.
Due to the speed Wiz was traveling when he hit Seabrook, any reference to the difference of height or weight is negated.
Competitive violence, that's why you're here!
any reference to the difference of height or weight is negated.
Are you saying he was skating so fast he reached terminal velocity?
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
you should have moderator rights. If someone calls anyone a name, warn the user and delete the comment. It’s tough for me to delete when the conversation continues like this.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Why doesnt he have those rights? cant you give them to whoever?
I know multiple people have them on other blogs. I would love to be incharge of that but I don’t think you need it it isn’t like you have a ton of traffic unless this stuff keeps up. Daneil should have them for sure.
Co-Leader of the annual 7 round live mock draft at MtD
by TheAngelsColts on Mar 18, 2010 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions
i think he does. he’s not big on playing witht he dashboard though.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions
oh I see.
for me I just dont like trolls and am good at knowing when it aint going to stop though I normally give them a chance to change before flagging. I guess with the football blog I just see a ton it seems. This will probably die down after today and most will never come back.
Co-Leader of the annual 7 round live mock draft at MtD
by TheAngelsColts on Mar 18, 2010 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions
i didn’t think we were being particularly incendiary, but since I couldn’t get to the discussion until late, it kind of progressed in a direction without me. I don’t think the post itself should ever be read as us saying that this was a legal hit. We both say he doesn’t have the puck here. And yet, as people dug their heels in during the comments, that’s how everyone is taking it
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions
No I understood exactly how you were saying it and agree it went where you were not saying.
Also they already hate the ducks so in turn hat us (why can they not be like the patiots? I hate the team but the people on there blog for the most part are great)
Co-Leader of the annual 7 round live mock draft at MtD
by TheAngelsColts on Mar 18, 2010 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Possibility of doing serious damage
Moot Point. The effect of both hits was obvious. One guy is sore and the other guy’s career is in jeopardy.
seriously it is one thing to disagree it is another to be attacking people cool down and discuss
Co-Leader of the annual 7 round live mock draft at MtD
by TheAngelsColts on Mar 18, 2010 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
you've been warned
on the personal attack. not that I think you’ll ever be coming back, but just to be clear to anyone reading what you wrote, there are no ad hominem attacks in this community. this is not a yahoo comment board.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Thank you.
would have flagged him but figured you had it already since we don’t have a lot of comments. Seriously though I really find it irritating when people just come over and attack the other blog and are unwilling to just discuss civilly
Co-Leader of the annual 7 round live mock draft at MtD
by TheAngelsColts on Mar 18, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
I was at the game and Ive seen the replays
so here’s my take, for what its worth:
If a Duck had hit Patrick Kane or Toews the way Seabrook hit Perry, its a penalty. No question about it. But because it was a Duck getting sent awkwardly into the boards, no call AND a lost offensive opportunity.
As for the Wiz hit, I’d like to start by saying it would go a long way toward debating this if people got their facts straight. Just like the Mike Brown hit on Hudler where everyone claimed he threw an elbow, watch the replay. Wiz barely gets his hands up. He DOES NOT throw a shoulder or an elbow.
Was it charging? Absolutely. Should he be suspended? I don’t think so. He was sticking up for his team mate and and Seabrook was not in a position to protect himeself. From my vantage point when the hit occured, I thought Seabrook had actually played the puck, but he was just right there and never touched it.
Will he be suspended? Absolutely. He’s a Duck, he’s a nobody, he hit a star, and he hit him just days after the NHL reluctantly suspended Ovie for a worse hit.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 7:50 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
the fact that Seabrook didn't have the puck
AND Wiz came from the blueline with a bottle rocket up his ass makes it clear that this was a retaliatory play with intent to injure. There is no doubt he wasn’t playing the puck, and no doubt he was trying to send Seabrook a message. If you want to argue that Seabrook being hit was the consequence of the hit on Perry (who had the puck), then you should completely agree that a suspension is in order for Wiz as a consequence for the hit on Seabrook.
by ProbertandErnie on Mar 18, 2010 8:30 AM PDT up reply actions
I still dont think
hitting a guy in the chest that’s staring straight at you is intent to injure. Was it retaliatory? Absolutely! And I love that he stood up for Perry. Did it look ugly? Yeah, it did. But you can’t seriously say that if the roles were reversed you wouldn’t feel the same way.
Here’s the other thing. Your a Hawks fan. You’re not used to seeing your team get jobbed by the zebras on a nightly basis. I guarantee that part of the hit was frustration that a pretty obvious penalty on one of our best players on the ice went uncalled.
If I were a Hawks fan I’d probably be pissed too. But I like to think I would recognize that Seabrook committed a questionable play that earned him the hit he got. If you asked Wiz, I really doubt he was trying to kill Seabrook. Afterall, they were teammates not so long ago.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 8:41 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Refs are Refs
They’re born blind. Like moles. Or Ducks fans. Don’t act like your team is the only one in the NHL to get shafted by refs. I don’t have have “Fox Sports The Hills” or care to watch the Disney Channel, so I don’t watch all of your games. Therefore I can’t say whether or not you’ve been the victim of zebra discrimination on a nightly basis. I’ll assume you’re not watching all of our games either, so keep your generalizations.
I will agree with you that if Buff, for example, would have taken a run at Wiz in the corner in a similar situation, I would have thoroughly enjoyed watching him drift off to Oz as he melts down the boards like a cartoon. However, in the midst of my animalistic joy, I would certainly have said “Ohhhh, this fucker better get suspended. I love you, Buff, but you deserve some golf time for that one…”
by ProbertandErnie on Mar 18, 2010 8:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Way to go derogatory
I’m glad we can keep this a civil conversation without throwing in useless invective. Nice work.
Just because your not in a position to protect yourself doesn’t mean its automatically suspension worthy. As others have pointed out, perry had his back to Seabrook when he got hit. Doesn’t get much more vulnerable than that.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 8:55 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
The hit on Perry
Is a different argument. I agree that hit had potential to be disastrous. Had Perry been turned at an even slightly different angle, he’d have been seeing cartoon birds. And Seabrook would likely have deserved a suspension.
The only thing I’ve taken issue with here is:
1) Your whining about getting “jobbed” by the zebras nightly as though no one else is a victim of the same refs sucking it up all over the league. Playing the victim reduces your credibility in my book.
2) The fact that you still somehow don’t see this as a headshot. Just because the ‘bows made contact with the chest doesn’t mean that he didn’t drive them straight up through Seabrook’s dome and send him to a happier place.
And as far as your “derogatory” comment goes, settle down. No reason I can’t amuse myself a little while responding to your misguided observations.
by ProbertandErnie on Mar 18, 2010 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions
it’s fine to walk the line short of insulting the other commenter, ProbertandErnie, but don’t cross the line into trolling. Keep it 80/20 substance to comedy at least.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions
and now I will say to you also keep it civil and discuss.
Co-Leader of the annual 7 round live mock draft at MtD
by TheAngelsColts on Mar 18, 2010 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions
In your own words...
“…Seabrook was not in a position to protect himeself. From my vantage point when the hit occured, I thought Seabrook had actually played the puck, but he was just right there and never touched it.”
That is the exact reason why this was a crappy play, and the exact reason why he should be suspended.
Here's another set of screen caps showing Seabrook's hit on Perry
Pic# 1 Perry is facing Seabrook
Pic# 2 Perry begins to turn
Pic# 3 Contact
This all happened in about 2 seconds. No way Seabrook could have avoided this and no penalty should have been called because Perry is the one that turned. I’ve seen Kane and Toews both hit like this without any call by an official
Competitive violence, that's why you're here!
Perry is trying to avoid him. Seabrook knows he can let him go there, and if he reaches, whatever hits Perry will NOT be shoulder. They’re about the same height, but Seabrook knows that this could end up a forearm to the head or an elbow to the head. There’s an intent to go high with something that is not his shoulder the moment he extends his arms. If our forward corps wasn’t banged up, I’d say a fight could handle this. If we’d taken a run like that at Keith, I’m sure the retaliation for the Hawks would have been based just as firmly in frontier justice since their defensive corps is so banged up
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions
Agreed
Were the tables turned, a similar style of justice may have been carried out. If that were the case, I’d at least see it for what it is. I think what’s making most of us Hawks fans a little Coo Coo for CoCo Puffs today is just the lack of acknowledgment that it was exactly what you just said: Frontier Justice.
It gets the blood boiling when you see a post saying our reactions are just Blackhawk bias because these Duck reactions all the way down to the culprit himself in the postgame interview (Wiz) seem to be SO blind to the sheer FACT that it was a dirty, dirty hit. The analysis of whether his hands where up and his feet off the ground is erroneous. We all know as hockey fans what happened with that hit.
Now granted, when said blood starts boiling things may get emotional and outside the realm of good hockeytalk. I’m certainly guilty in this regard and I don’t want these boards to turn into a Jerry Springer shitshow, so that’s on me. But I’d say that a “biased” disregard of the realities of the situation is just as inviting of an emotional response as saying you play on the Disney Channel.
Just sayin’.
by ProbertandErnie on Mar 18, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
I definitely understand the blood boiling, but I don’t know if you should bring your anger from other places here. This post is pretty clear that you can’t hit someone without the puck, no matter how “legal” the hit. Seabrook was injured, end of story. That’s why they have the 5 minute Major for Interference; it would be unfair to ask the refs to watch every player without the puck when he gets hit.
I personally don’t care about him leaving his feet, but only because the NHL has conditioned me to believe that isn’t relevant by never punishing Kronwall for anything he does. Analyzing intent and charging to try and predict what Campbell would do is futile to me. But I think we can put an expectation on the refs here. They know they let somethign borderline go with Perry, and when they saw the retaliation, they have to call the 5 minute Major there. Maybe Seabrook got up a little too quickly for their tastes, but he’s standing right there. He sees him crumple like a Punch-Out character. We shouldn’t need the stretcher to call that an injury.
The Disney Channel was a good one, definitely, but like i was saying, something like 80/20 substance to comedy is what we’re looking for here, otherwise you’re just trolling people and throwing in a relevant blurb.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
The Boiling Blood
Was in reference to the cumulative effect of multiple commenters bringing “you’re a biased blackhawk fan”-type comments to the table. The anger in this regard wasn’t brought here, it was born here through frustration from this type of comment. I’m not going to harp on this, just wanted to make sure you were clear what I was referencing.
What I can say is that regardless of the level of vitriol in the comments, this amount of passion is good to see for the game. More and more people getting fired up means more and more people are returning to the greatest sport on earth. I think the talent and excitement in the game (not just in Chicago) is at the highest level it’s been in a long time.
Good luck in your future endeavors, Mother Duckers. :)
by ProbertandErnie on Mar 18, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I just watched the replay, and after Perry turns his back, Seabrook took an extra stride. That means he had plenty of time to make the decision to not go after Perry. He could have avoided this hit, he just chose not to.
I think there’s a moment where he thinks he’s going to get him, but when he sees a that a guy with the puck is going to dodge him, he extends his arms. You can talk about how it’s 2 seconds, but last I checked, these were professional defensemen. No one has ever said “Favre only had three seconds to make a decision” after an interception. You know a guy is going to beat you, you have plenty of time to let him beat you. Or you can reach to make sure you get him. If you reach, you’re liable or whatever happens to him and whatever you happen to him with.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
doesnt help when all you read
are ducks blogs…right from espn:
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/blackhawks/post/_/id/4662320/seabrook-hit-raises-quennevilles-ire
It also soesnt help
when you point to articles of quotes by players on your team (did you really think Quenninville would say that was a legal hit?) or articles that trot out the same tired memes about the Ducks.
The biggest problem in this game is that the referees lost control. If they accurately call the penalty on the hit to Perry, the Wiz hit probably doesn’t happen. Its pretty obvious, as I said earlier, that if Wiz had thrown the hit Seabrook threw on Perry to Kane or Toews that you would also be apoplectic and demanding a response.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 8:33 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
If you'd like an opinion on the hit from an non-Blackhawks source...
Here ya go…
http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/bob_mckenzie/?id=314522
Side effects may include: Thrifty Knuckles, Sexual Nightmares, and Sleep Crime
by AirTrafficAJ on Mar 18, 2010 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions
Blackhawks fan here
I’m glad you all like Wiz. He’s a likeable guy off the ice as we all know. On the Ice, he’s a douchebag as you are finding out if you have not figured it out already.
For anybody to say that he elbows are not up and it’s not a high hit, you must be blind. Go to the eye doctor, because this is the definition of intent to injure that you are seeing. (see pictures from cdz3210)
I only wish that our guys could meet your guys in the playoffs, but that’s not going to happen now is it? Have a nice spring and summer.
Good luck with Wiz. Be sure to get some Wiz wear. It’ll be a collectors item next year.
"All questions must be submitted in writing"
Care to post the images here?
If they’re so definitive, why aren’t they all over the place?
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 8:44 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
His hands are at the Indian
image on the guys jersey when he hits him (second image). How exactly is this a head shot?
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 8:52 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Look at the stick!
Ok, according to the images the arms of Wiz brush Seabrook as they are going up. If you watch where his stick is the whole time, it shows you Wiz’s intentions. This was pointed about the by the Chicago announcers, and I’m surprised no one has commented on it. If he was playing the puck, why was his stick in the air? If he was aiming for Seabrook’s chest, why does his stick come so high? Image 3 clearly shows his true intent. He was leaping to make contact with Seabrook’s head. Just a dumb, heat of the moment play.
Oh he was definitely trying to hit him
and he could care less about the puck. No argument from me here.
You say he’s “leaping to make contact” and yet his skates are on the ice in all the images. As for the position of the stick, when guys normally finish a check in the corner, where is the stick? This is a serious question. I can’t remember off the top of my head where their sticks normally are. I’m pretty sure you don’t have it parallel else it would be a cross check.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 9:02 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
His skates doe leave the ice
Although it may not be crystal clear in the images posted here, Wiz’s skates did leave the ice. CSN Chicago showed at least 10 replays of the hit from the eye level and Wiz’s skates were at least 3-4 inches off the ice. One thing I found interesting in watching the replay on my DVR is that the announcers for Chicago called the hit before it happened. They saw the head of Wiz’s stick in the air. The first rule of any D man is that the head of the stick is always on the ice. It was just a dumb play. Wiz had a clear intention.
I applaud Coach Q for being the bigger man and issuing an no retaliation on Wiz.. Personally I like Wiz…I just think that the pressure of the game got to him and he made a dumb decision – and for such should be punished appropriately.
since when has intent to injure been punished consistently or effectively? I honestly doubt Ovechkin intended to injure Campbell.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Ovechkin vs Wiz
The situation between these hits is pretty clearly different in my book.
Ovechkin’s hit:
the result of overly aggresive and unnecessary shove from behind at the end of a play in which the two were jockeying for position to get to the puck. Key factor:
the two were involved in an agressive hockey play, which of course Ovechkin took a step further.
Intent:
Ovechkin just wanted to bully Campbell a bit, not mame him.
Verdict:
Manslaughter
Wiz hit:
the result of retaliation for a questionable hit delivered to Perry from Seabrook
Key factor:
these two were not involved in a play. in fact, they weren’t anywhere near one another, and Seabrook did not have the puck. this greatly changes the intent debate
Intent:
to punish Seabrook via violent hit for the earlier hit on Perry (a premeditated offense)
Verdict:
Premeditated Murder
IMO, intent to injure is pretty cut and dry in both situations, right?
by ProbertandErnie on Mar 18, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
From what I remember of the play, Keith had the puck behind the net and he sends it up the boards right around the time Wiz is coming down from the blueline. Seabrook doesn’t handle the puck, but it does go right by him. If you continue with the argumentation that I’ve heard in favor of the Seabrook hit, that he had already started to take the body on Perry and therefore couldn’t stop himself, then you can make the same argument for Wiz. He was starting to take the body on Seabrook based on the idea that Keith was going to pass him the puck, or that the puck was in the vicinity of him.
Let me say this. Remember when the puck was in the vicinity of Havlat and Kronwall crushed him? You could call this a similar play, except Seabrook should have seen Wisniewski coming. Remember how almost everyone in the media defended Kronwall because as everyone knows anyone in a Red Wings sweater is a saint? I didn’t follow the Chicago blogs, but I bet there was plenty of outrage. Hell, Anaheim fans were pissed because Brown laid a similar hit on a Red Wing, can’t remember who, and was called a dirty player. This double standard is ALWAYS applied to the Ducks. No Duck player is ever given the benefit of the doubt, and when questionable hits are laid on us they are always called clean.
At best we should all be able to admit that Seabrook’s hit was dirty. I’m sorry, he went for the head. Even if you say the hit started at the shoulder of a bent over player, the pressure applied to the back of the shoulders/neck area led to a follow through hit to the head. This is the same thing that Wisniewski did. He started in the chest and his follow through went to the head. At best these are equally awful hits. I’m not glad this happened. Chicago fans might not believe this, but my second favorite team in the Western Conference is the Blackhawks and I thought as fans we’d be able to understand each other through mutual hate of Detroit. I’m just saying, both hits were bad and we can’t say one was worse simply because a player got injured. If Wiz would have been hurt, I’d like to think I’d critique him for being made of gingerbread just like Arthur does, rather than blame the hit.
<blockquoteBrown laid a similar hit on a Red Wing, can’t remember who>
Haha. so now we get down to the real reason Daniel is defending the hit. Haha. This was your chance to hate on Wisniewski for free, and you passed. It was Hudler by the way.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
didnt see those above
My bad. And initial contact is the chest. You can see that. His momentum carries him upward. His elbows and shoulders are not aimed at his head.
And the guy that posted the image even admits he’s not leaving his skates though he divines that its pretty clear he meant to.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 8:47 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
His elbow is in his face!
Holy crap. You have got to be joking. Put the beverage down. This is a high hit, a charge, and the puck, I don’t see it.
As I said. Wiz is a douchbag
"All questions must be submitted in writing"
This is my last comment on this
Because I gotta get to work. Initial contact is the chest and his follow through brings his arms up. This happens on most checks since guys don’t hit each other with their arms down.
I hate to see Seabrook get hurt and I hope he’s ok. I don’t think Wiz wanted to hurt the guy, I think he just wanted to hit him hard to send a message. He’ll probably get suspended.
by PhantomPretender on Mar 18, 2010 9:07 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Here's one more screen cap
He definitely leaves his skates
Competitive violence, that's why you're here!
I think he has to leave his skates. This isn’t like Kronwall’s Flying Elbow routine. He’s giving up four inches to the guy. If he doesn’t leave his skates to check Seabrook, it’s probably a penalty for kneeing.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Has to leave his skates?!
You can’t be serious. He only has to leave his skates if his intent is to hit Seabrook in the head. I suspect you must be making light becuase the facts are incontrovertible . Likeable or not, Wiz took a horrifically cheap shot on Seabrook. No matter how often or how loudly he professes he was just forechecking and did not intend to injure Seabrook, his actions always speak much louder than his words.
that was a joke about how short Wisniewski is. Little guys do tend to leave their skates hitting players from the front, though there aren’t necessarily boards involved behind the player’s head when they do it. I made the joke because him leaving his skates isn’t relevant to the play call on the ice. It’s a Major for Interference. The refs have no duty to examine how people without the puck get hit; this one just happened to be near the ref and he was dumb enough to go with Charging instead of a proper Major.
As far as leaving his skates being relevant to Campbell’s decision making, show me one decision where it was and I’ll show you fifty where it wasn’t, not to mention a thousand Kronwall hits.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
CYOUNG:
It’s all great and fun to be loyal to your team, but a lot of us are first and foremost hockey fans, and that hit was late and dirty, with clear intent to injure. The hit on Perry may have been a little late, but it was nowhere near the hit on Seabrook.
P.S. It automatically displays the name of the author when you post a blog entry. Neat, huh?
Neat, huh?
Yes, and if you had read this post, you would see that we often post with two voices on a single blog entry. We add the names for clarity and we occasionally try to post news stories as cold entries under the name Teletype. Thanks for coming to the blog, but please don’t try to confuse our existing readers if you have no intention of staying and seeing how we do things here.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh snap! Arthur’s puttin’ his foot down!
Here’s my take:
Seabrook should get fined and/or suspended 1 game for his hit on Perry that started this whole hoopla.
Wis should get suspended 3 games for a charge that was uncalled for and NOT for “intent to injure” or even the hit itself.
Sopel should get some flying lessons from Superman. Still can’t stop laughing about that.
Also, as much as I enjoyed the entertainment value of the game last night at Honda Center, the refs should face some sort of disciplinary action for letting things escalate the way they did. If a call was made on Seabrook then a lot of this could have been avoided.
stupid hawk fans
heeyyy guess what stupid hawk fans? shut the f up cause you all dont know crap and at least our franchise didnt need 100000000000 drafts to even compete… the league is a joke they only suck up to aholes like you and pittsburgh… why isnt anybody talking about seabrooks hit on perry… this blog is probably ten thousand times better than what you got going on in chicago
this is very borderline, but as I’ve already let the moron comment live on this post, I’ll let it slide as long as you don’t personally call out a Hawks commenter. See, even I’m having trouble getting the reins of this comment board
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I like the post, and it’s tough to really pin down what Colin Campbell is thinking, but he has said before that receiving a game misconduct and being thrown out of the game mitigates the length of the suspension or the issuing of a suspension. he sees it a s a form of suspension in itself. As a team that has actually received discipline on this stuff repeatedly, I think I have an idea of what mitigates a suspension call, or as much as anyone can with Campbell. But as we both said a suspension was coming in the post, and I said Campbell could come down on him and come down on him hard, I don’t know why our comments are getting twisted into a full defense of this as a legal hit.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions
“Seabrook was focusing on the puck and the play at his own peril while his "really close friend" – Wiz’s words not mine – took a malicious, blind side run at him.”
From your link.
Since when is a face first hit the same as a “blind side run”?
blind side, back pressure is a Scott Stevens hit. That’s what’s on the table to be outlawed for next year. No player hit with a shoulder to the face from the front will be penalized as I understand the proposed rule from the GM’s. I won’t get into the other problems with the post, but I definitely think separating facts from incorrect facts is a bold title if you’re going to get even one thing wrong. Here you will always find our opinion and our analysis, and simply by nature of the fact that Daniel and I don’t agree wholeheartedly from question to question, you should never see us as the final word on the impartial factual take on anything.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions
It’s a bold title to say the least. That whole damn post was far from objective.
Funny thing was that last night at the game I was actually beginning to think the Ducks may have outgrown the league’s stranglehold on them in the disciplinary department. When Sopel dove, it occurred to me that in most cases Perry would have been given a penalty. Then I got home and my brother was telling me he thinks Wis will get suspended (I was sitting at the other end of the ice in section 213, I think). So much for that thought!
It’s tough for me to explain how nothing happened on the Sopel dive. In the context of the game, I’m not sure what they were thinking.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Author of FF Post
Arthur, first the “Facts from Incorrect Facts” was actually a poor attempt at humor. I’m sure I’m known in the Hawk blogosphere for those. Obviously, there is no such thing as an “incorrect fact.”
As for calling it a “blind side run,” I stand by that. To me, Seabrook was looking in one direction and Wiz hit him from another; the side that Wiz hit him from is the blind side. On the other hand, I see how you’re using the term.
As for my objectivity in my article, I prefaced the post with the words, “throwing objectivity to the wind.” I was answering what I thought was a biased opinion with my own.
In the end, I stand by my guns. I knew the NHL would see it my way, too.
by Fifth Feather Bob on Mar 18, 2010 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions
As you stated, your way is “throwing objectivity to the wind”. Seems the the NHL did the same. Not to say I’m surprised. This just adds to the long list of times the Ducks got shafted by Campbell.
Eight games…. Really?
Nate:
I didn’t necessarily say my way was “throwing objectivity to the wind.”
You think the NHL is wrong here? Wisniewski took a 40-foot run at a player who (i) wasn’t looking and (ii) didn’t have the puck. Seabrook, as expected, hit the deck like he was rifled down, and Lord knows how long he’ll be out.
Quite frankly, I’m stunned anyone could see it differently than the NHL did today.
And, as for the Ducks getting shafted by Campbell, to suggest that he has some bias against them is ridiculous. Facts are that you’ve got yourself a group of bangers and goons – purposefully put together, in fact – that will deserve, from time to time, certain post-game penalties.
by Fifth Feather Bob on Mar 18, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Goons? We’ve got guys like Parros riding the pine so “goons” like Sexton can play. Take a closer look at the Ducks roster before you go bantering on about the team being “a group of bangers and goons”. If you knew anything about the Ducks this season you should know that they lack toughness presence since Prongs was traded.
I don’t think the NHL is wrong in issuing Wis a suspension, however I think eight games is extremely lengthy. I also think it’s absurd that Seabrook wasn’t given a penalty let alone a hearing and/or fine. Am I surprised? No. That’s the point I’m trying to make. Was I surprised when Dion elbowed Ebbett in the face from a head hit and broke his nose last season? No. I can give you a list of events such as these and point the finger and none other than Campbell. He’s been consistent with his actions in that he doesn’t suspend any player who commits an illegal play against someone in an Anaheim jersey.
All that I ask is you do your research before you come on here and flail around with your ignorant comments about this team.
I’ll go so far as to say that the NHL did what I thought it would do, and that given the recent string of actions by the league Wiz would be suspended. I’ll also take a second to say that I’m somewhat concerned at the general lack of critique of Seabrook’s hit. If two people shoot up a crowd, and one person kills someone and the other shooter only hurts someone is the second shooter’s crime REALLY less important and or irrelevant? NO. I’ll also take a second to say that when you are trying to solve a problem, you have to solve the cause and not the problem otherwise you don’t eliminate the actual problem. Just like weeding, you have to get to the root. Arthur has done a great job demonstrating that Seabrook went for Perry’s head. Even if you want to say that he didn’t get the full head of steam that Wiz did, Perry was in a much more vulnerable position as he was off balance and facing the boards. They are both VERY dangerous hits. I like that Wiz stuck for his teammates, especially after the refs showed they weren’t going to call the 2 minutes they could have for elbowing, roughing, or boarding. If we want to eliminate hits like WIz’s on Seabrook we need to eliminate Seabrook’s hit that caused Wisniewski’s otherwise you don’t solve the problem. You can’t evaluate these hits separately. They don’t exist in a void. One directly causes the other.
On a side note, I think you misrepresent my argument in your post. The two statements do not contradict. My description of the hit does not represent a statement on to the suspendable nature of the hit. A lot of players get smoked with or without the puck. Smoked is a way of describing a hard hit. We might have different uses of the term, but either way it is still an assessment of the type of hit and not whether or not it is suspendable.
Finally, I think I’ve become more committed to defending Wiz/this hit simply because the vast majority of Chicago fans refuse to admit that Seabrook’s hit was even questionable. Sorry, it wasn’t a clean hit, and I’m not budging on that. Arthur has shown pics of him reaching with his elbows towards Perry’s head. How can people keep denying this? Even if you refuse to believe that he elbowed Perry in the head, is it still a good idea to check a player whose weight is already leaning forward, in the shoulder blades and force his weight and his head into the boards? I just reread the secondcityhockey post and I’ve read yours. I believe you describe Perry as “squirming to avoid the hit”, very loaded language I might add. I’m not going to say I’m not a homer. I think you make a great point about how bloggers are inherently homers. I just wish Chicago fans would own up to it a little more and realize that Seabrook wasn’t the victim everyone is trying to make him out to be.
If Corey Perry had such a problem with Seabrook’s hit, then he should’ve addressed it himself. He’s a fairly big man who can handle himself.
I don’t understand the logic in saying, “Well Seabrook’s hit was dangerous so it’s ok to respond with a hit that’s twice as dangerous.”
Seabrook’s hit might have been slightly questionable and if a few other scenarios played out, he could’ve hurt Perry. Wisniewski’s was a no-doubt dirty, illegal hit that has no place in the game. There was plenty of other ways for Wisniewski to let Seabrook know he didn’t like that hit; Wisniewski chose the worst and could’ve very well have ended Seabrook’s career.
FifthFeather.com
by El Duque's Raft on Mar 18, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions
If a few other scenarios played out, Seabrook could have ended Perry’s career. That’s the point I’m really trying to make. Seabrook was lucky that Perry wasn’t hurt; Wisniewski wasn’t so lucky. Look to my analogy about people shooting up a crowd of people. Both of them are doing something stupid and both of them are trying to hurt people, just because one succeeds in doing more damage, it doesn’t mean that his act was more or less malicious. This is another example of the league punishing the injury. That’s bad. It’s just like our justice system. If you punish a crime, you don’t stop criminals, because you haven’t stopped the cause of the crime.
It’s not whether or not Perry could have fought Seabrook. Perry is the last star forward we have, with Getzlaf out and he can’t get drawn into that fight. He needs to be on the ice to score goals when we’re stuck in a 1-1 tie. He needs someone to step up, because he needs to help anchor the top line when Getzlaf’s hurt. That’s why Arthur said, Seabrook’s hit is uniquely bad because he went after a key scorer when our forward corps is severely depleted. Even so, Seabrook has 2 fighting majors this year. Granted one of them was about 2 weeks ago, but he’s not exactly a fighter. You can’t tell me with your forward corp so depleted that one of your top 4 guys was going to get into a fight over this. If anything, I think this is a key problem being overlooked. Chances are high that Seabrook wouldn’t fight and risk further injury and maybe he thought people wouldn’t touch him based on the problems Chicago has read recently. Either way, I don’t know if there’s enough evidence to convince me that Seabrook would have dropped the gloves and answered the call for his hit on Perry.
by Daniel AC on Mar 18, 2010 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
here’s the thing, though. I saw it as a suspendable offense as well. I never said it was a legal hit in the post or anywhere else, simply that it was predictable retaliation and that Campbell could come down on him as hard as he likes for it. Tthe way we’re linked and summarized at Second City Hockey and on Yahoo right now, it makes it sound like we wrote a full defense.
I know our point-counterpoint can be disarming, but Daniel and I disagree on many of the finer points here, and there is always going to be confusion if you quote one of us assuming he speaks for both. As I said, I liked your post, and I don’t fault you for quoting us as one person or misrepresenting us as most everyone has. But I stand by my opinion of the matter, too, as the NHL has seen it my way, as well.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Goons? We’ve got guys like Parros riding the pine so "goons" like Sexton can play. Take a closer look at the Ducks roster before you go bantering on about the team being "a group of bangers and goons". If you knew anything about the Ducks this season you should know that they lack a toughness presence since Prongs was traded.
I don’t think the NHL is wrong in issuing Wis a suspension, however I think eight games is extremely lengthy. I also think it’s absurd that Seabrook wasn’t given a penalty let alone a hearing and/or fine. Am I surprised? No. That’s the point I’m trying to make. Was I surprised to hear nothing from the league when Dion elbowed Ebbett in the face from a head hit and broke his nose last season? No. I can give you a list of events such as these and point the finger and none other than Campbell. He’s been consistent with his actions in that he doesn’t suspend any player who commits an illegal play against someone in an Anaheim jersey.
All that I ask is you do your research before you come on here and flail around with your ignorant comments about this team.
Couple corrections. I forgot to proofread. My sincerest condolences.
I'm sorry
But as Anaheim (according to NHL.com) is the 2rd worst penalized team in the league, how could we assume that the Ducks are anything other than “a group of bangers and goons”?
I agree with your assertion that the NHL is horribly inconsistent with this type of thing. They’ve let the inmates run the asylum for far too long, and now they are trying to regain control. Wiz is probably going to be the first of many in this regard.
Side effects may include: Thrifty Knuckles, Sexual Nightmares, and Sleep Crime
by AirTrafficAJ on Mar 18, 2010 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it’s something that has just stuck around. There was a time when it was pretty true, like 2007. But it’s really not the case anymore. We still get a lot of reputation calls from 2007 and as someone who does watch pretty much every game, I can tell you it is extraordinarily frustrating to have every team who visits your building get the benefit of the doubt, while yours as seen as always taking a penalty.
I am a huge Ducks fan and personally can’t stand anything from the least coast or the least side of the states, but that being said I do believe Wiz deserved a suspension maybe not 8 games but like 3 or 4, the guy got up like nothing happened after his legs did the noodle shuffle., and it was a retaliation hit for what he had done earlier so i am glad that he stuck up for Perry.I think things like this been happening in the NHL for many many moons and this year they are finally starting to try to clean up their act
If practice makes perfect....
Yet nobodies perfect.....
Then why practice ???
i’ve seen you peetey. Combo kings/ducks fan as i recall. belated welcome if i neglected to throw one at you before.
by Arthur from Anaheim Calling on Mar 18, 2010 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Anaheim Calling
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
CK Photo Galleries
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
